- #141
turbo
Gold Member
- 3,165
- 56
Pretty lame, ain't it? Either one is a guaranteed loser in a general election.cronxeh said:300 million people and these 2 are the best candidates we can come up with?
Pretty lame, ain't it? Either one is a guaranteed loser in a general election.cronxeh said:300 million people and these 2 are the best candidates we can come up with?
from http://time-blog.com/theag/A storm in a tea cup is also the party line being touted by Hillary Clinton's campaign in the light of two new critical books about the presidential candidate. "The Hillary Clinton who emerges from the pages of the books comes across as a complicated, sometimes compromised figure," writes the Washington Post. The books by former Post writer Carl Bernstein and NYT writers, Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr., will have more punch than the myriad accusations leveled against Clinton over the years because "they come from long-established writers backed by major publishing houses," says the WPost. "The news here is that it took three reporters nearly a decade to find no news," says Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson.
So she can be a War President, like Bush? "The War on Warming!"Astronuc said:I heard today that H Clinton wants the Pentagon/DOD to start looking at Global Warming as a national security issue. Now, we already have the Dept. of Commerce (NOAA), NASA, and Department of Energy looking at GW - but why do we need the DOD to study it?
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/07/30/gingrich_weighs_in_on_campaign_calls/Democrats will nominate Hillary Clinton for president in 2008 and Barack Obama will be her running mate, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich predicts [continued]
http://mediamatters.org/items/200707150002NOVAK: Republicans are very pessimistic about 2008. When you talk to them off the record, they don't see how they can win this thing. And then they think for a minute, and only the Democratic Party, with everything in their favor, would say that, "OK, this is the year either to have a woman or an African-American to break precedent, to do things the country has never done before." And it gives the Republicans hope.[continued]
Astronuc said:I heard today that H Clinton wants the Pentagon/DOD to start looking at Global Warming as a national security issue. Now, we already have the Dept. of Commerce (NOAA), NASA, and Department of Energy looking at GW - but why do we need the DOD to study it?
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2004/02/09/360120/index.htmFebruary 9, 2004
...The result is an unclassified report, completed late last year, that the Pentagon has agreed to share with FORTUNE. It doesn't pretend to be a forecast. Rather, it sketches a dramatic but plausible scenario to help planners think about coping strategies. Here is an abridged version: [continued]
I didn't spot the .gov or .mil version but it all seems to be legit.
http://www.climate.org/PDF/clim_change_scenario.pdf
cronxeh said:300 million people and these 2 are the best candidates we can come up with?
I was thinking in terms of a redundant program. All administration departments have their particular responsibilities, but hopefully there is cooperation on common or related concerns.Ivan Seeking said:So it seems that the DOD is already involved. And of course the motiviation is clear: GCC is potentially a matter of national security, so it is the job of the DOD to evaluate these concerns.
Astronuc said:Is it too much to ask for an efficient/functional government rather than a dysfunctional one? :uhh:
Astronuc said:It has to be either Clinton or Obama - but both in the #1 and #2 slots?
I saw this headline - In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd - and all I could think was "What does that really mean?"
There was something improbable about the new guy from Chicago via Honolulu and Jakarta, Indonesia, the one with the Harvard law degree and the job teaching constitutional law...
Ivan Seeking said:But you are forgetting the first rule in government spending: Why build [or have] one when you can build two for twice the price?
Source that quote anyone...?